TCP vs Global West coil over front suspensions - Vintage Mustang Forums

Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 54 (permalink) Old 11-11-2010, 07:23 PM Thread Starter
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 46
TCP vs Global West coil over front suspensions

Hope to be taking the plunge soon. '67 Mustang coupe application. Small block powerplant. Performance street/roadrace slant. Experiences, advantages, considerations all sought.
pavulon is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 54 (permalink) Old 11-11-2010, 07:47 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Charlotte NC
Posts: 1,389
For less dinero, you can get good results with the stock arms , relocated using the Pro-Motorsports negative wedge kit, roller spring perches, Street or Track strut rods, 600lb springs, and Bilstein or Koni shocks.
Jsams is offline  
post #3 of 54 (permalink) Old 11-11-2010, 08:18 PM
Senior Member
 
GT289's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: SoCal
Posts: 6,463
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jsams View Post
For less dinero, you can get good results with the stock arms , relocated using the Pro-Motorsports negative wedge kit, roller spring perches, Street or Track strut rods, 600lb springs, and Bilstein or Koni shocks.
He's looking at coil-over stuff. There's a MASSIVE difference in cornering performance
and ride, compared to the items you're mentioning.

My issue with TCP is rod ends on suspensions that could be used on the street.
The adjustability feature touted by TCP is also problematic because you can change
the length of the control arm and affect things possibly in a negative manner.
Too much technology, in my opinion, for most folks.

ex-Global West GM
1991-1994

As the drill sergeant said, "I taught you everything you know. I didn't teach you everything I know."

"Human beings, who are almost unique in having the ability to learn from the experience of others, are also remarkable for their apparent disinclination to do so."
- Douglas Adams
GT289 is online now  
 
post #4 of 54 (permalink) Old 11-11-2010, 08:49 PM
Senior Member
 
supershifter2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Frum Hear Two Their Eventually
Posts: 10,106
unless your going to be all out roadracing at the track with slicks and doing testing to fine tune the coil over system i highly recomend not going the coil over route. a fixed system from maeco motorsport , or global west with some good performance radials will distort your face in a high speed turn ! that coil over stuff with the adjustable lenght uca is for someone with lots of experience tuning a car for the track. even running a fixed uca will require some camber adjusting to get the most tire grip in a turn for a particuler car-spring-shock-sway bar combo. you do realize the mustang already has a coil over suspension in the front ! just lowering the factory uca 1" with 620 springs a 1" sway bar and koni shocks will make a night and day difference in the way it handles. put some 180 lb leafs in the back with a maier racing panard bar to lower the rear roll center and some wet and dry weather tires like the hankook ventus r-s3 will blow your mind how great it corners. you will also need the power to bring it out of the turns to.

Last edited by supershifter2; 11-11-2010 at 08:53 PM.
supershifter2 is offline  
post #5 of 54 (permalink) Old 11-11-2010, 09:01 PM
Senior Member
 
slow-poke's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,315
I had cut coils, Arning drop, big sway bar, bump steer kit, etc and the car handled a fair bit better than stock.

Then I installed a TCP R&P and coil-over and the change from the "Shelby setup" is dramatic, the car turns like a go-kart now. My only advice would be to order a softer than recommnded spring if your car will see street duty.

408 - 5 spd. 10.x through the mufflers
slow-poke is offline  
post #6 of 54 (permalink) Old 11-12-2010, 06:07 AM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Charlotte NC
Posts: 1,389
Just for my own education, how is the geometry different on say a Global west setup from a setup with the stock type upper arm dropped 1.75" and a ball joint wedge?
Where are the massive performance gains coming from? The coil over itself?
Jsams is offline  
post #7 of 54 (permalink) Old 11-12-2010, 10:07 AM
Senior Member
 
Lukesportsman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Western Indiana
Posts: 1,166
I've talked myself out of the adj UCA's but still the argument about moving spring and shock package to lower arm intrigues me. From those of you who have ran both, for a fairly serious DE type car on R compound tires, is the movement of the spring pressure to LCA's evident?

My biggest question here is and may well be the posters:

Roller perches, 620 springs and Koni's VS coilover so LCA's

In both cases tubular arms, strut rods and 1.375 upper arm drop would be used with neg wedge considerations. I'm just up in air over the spring location and differences in real world. To orginal question just to confuse you more also look at Street or Track LLC as his stuff seems to be similar to GW's with a few different options.

69 351 TKO Sport Roof, Ride Tech coilover
70 557 PG Mach I tube chassis 2650lb
70 427 TKO Sport Roof, SoT full chassis to be
70 351 FMX Mach I
67 347 TKO Coupe SoT/CAT5
67 289 C4 Coupe stockish cruiser
69 460 TKO Vert, Mustang Plus Grab a Track
94 351 TKO AIX, Maximum Motorsports
01 5.4 4L80E Twins and CrMo caged

http://www.hubgarage.com/mygarage/LukeSportsman
Lukesportsman is offline  
post #8 of 54 (permalink) Old 11-12-2010, 10:44 AM
Senior Member
 
Alan _MacDougall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Pacific NW
Posts: 1,059
Quote:
Originally Posted by slow-poke View Post
I had cut coils, Arning drop, big sway bar, bump steer kit, etc and the car handled a fair bit better than stock.

Then I installed a TCP R&P and coil-over and the change from the "Shelby setup" is dramatic, the car turns like a go-kart now. My only advice would be to order a softer than recommnded spring if your car will see street duty.
Ditto, TCP coilover system is excellent. A good qualified alignment guy will have no problem with the additional adjustments.
Alan _MacDougall is offline  
post #9 of 54 (permalink) Old 11-12-2010, 05:19 PM
Senior Member
 
GT289's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: SoCal
Posts: 6,463
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jsams View Post
Just for my own education, how is the geometry different on say a Global west setup from a setup with the stock type upper arm dropped 1.75" and a ball joint wedge?
Where are the massive performance gains coming from? The coil over itself?
The actual optimum number for the drop is closer to 1.5"...... the extra 1/4" that the
wedge kit suggests is too far.
The spring is actually a softer item for most applications. (540#)
The geometry of the GW arm is different. At the end is the obvious difference,
the angle of the ball joint is addressed. Much less noticeable, the GW arm is shorter
than the factory arm. It isn't much, but a small difference in this area yields a major
difference in camber curve.
No matter what you do with a stock length arm, you can't address the fact that the
length is wrong. Consequently, all you can do is put in a high rate spring, slowing the
oncoming positive camber gain. You can't generate a negative camber gain. You
will not maintain tire contact patch and your cornering WILL suffer.
There also is the difference of the bushings vs. steel on steel of the factory setup.
You eliminate squeaking and free up the suspension at the same time.

A 289HP car with the GW setup will walk away from a 65/66 Shelby on a road course
if they both have the same tires/wheels. It's not even a close contest.

ex-Global West GM
1991-1994

As the drill sergeant said, "I taught you everything you know. I didn't teach you everything I know."

"Human beings, who are almost unique in having the ability to learn from the experience of others, are also remarkable for their apparent disinclination to do so."
- Douglas Adams
GT289 is online now  
post #10 of 54 (permalink) Old 11-12-2010, 07:37 PM
Senior Member
 
Lukesportsman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Western Indiana
Posts: 1,166
I didn't doubt the merit of the tubular arms. I more interested in the difference in spring combos for a specific setup. Saying it another way, other than the obvious adjustability that C/O allow, how big of an improvement is it otherwise on a DE style car? Is moving the spring to the LCA another big leap forward or is it reaching dimenishing returns at this point for the dollar?

69 351 TKO Sport Roof, Ride Tech coilover
70 557 PG Mach I tube chassis 2650lb
70 427 TKO Sport Roof, SoT full chassis to be
70 351 FMX Mach I
67 347 TKO Coupe SoT/CAT5
67 289 C4 Coupe stockish cruiser
69 460 TKO Vert, Mustang Plus Grab a Track
94 351 TKO AIX, Maximum Motorsports
01 5.4 4L80E Twins and CrMo caged

http://www.hubgarage.com/mygarage/LukeSportsman
Lukesportsman is offline  
post #11 of 54 (permalink) Old 11-12-2010, 08:28 PM
Senior Member
 
supershifter2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Frum Hear Two Their Eventually
Posts: 10,106
in order to take full advantage of any of the above front setups work must be done on the rear to make it hook also.
supershifter2 is offline  
post #12 of 54 (permalink) Old 11-13-2010, 01:22 AM
Senior Member
 
GT289's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: SoCal
Posts: 6,463
Supershifter is right. The rear definitely has to be dealt with. Even a improper shock
ratio there makes a major difference (night and day). That's how sensitive these cars
really are.....

AFA the Coil Over question- there are major advantages to the design. Most of them
capitalize on its "clean sheet" design. You aren't hampered by the stock setup's
limitations. As a consequence, spring rates can be radically altered. In general, they
can often be much lower than they would be ordinarily.
Utilizing C/O, there is often as much a gain (again) in cornering performance, as there
was initially going from stock to a Negative Roll tubular control arm.

ex-Global West GM
1991-1994

As the drill sergeant said, "I taught you everything you know. I didn't teach you everything I know."

"Human beings, who are almost unique in having the ability to learn from the experience of others, are also remarkable for their apparent disinclination to do so."
- Douglas Adams
GT289 is online now  
post #13 of 54 (permalink) Old 11-13-2010, 04:19 AM
Senior Member
 
supershifter2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Frum Hear Two Their Eventually
Posts: 10,106
something else i dont recall ever being talked about is tires. you can put the absolute best handling suspension on your car but just because you have a hipo set of goodyear,hankook,kumho,bfg,etc doesnt mean that the type of tire you have is worth a daum in the turns. a lot of hp summer street tires are tested in fontana and the difference between some is night and day. my first encounter was back in the 70's when i switched from the goodyears i won auto crosses with to a tire a lot of the guys with shebys were using and i couldnt corner as fast b 4 spinning out. i went back to the goodyears until better tires were developed. tires are as important as the suspension system for handling and just cause a tire cost a lot doesnt mean its going to corner better then a cheaper tire.
supershifter2 is offline  
post #14 of 54 (permalink) Old 11-13-2010, 11:02 AM
Senior Member
 
Lukesportsman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Western Indiana
Posts: 1,166
Thanks for reply directly to that specific point, GT289. I guess I'll plan to dig a little deeper in my pocket when ordering then. I understood the theory, just wasn't sure in application of noticeable differences to my "butt ometer".

69 351 TKO Sport Roof, Ride Tech coilover
70 557 PG Mach I tube chassis 2650lb
70 427 TKO Sport Roof, SoT full chassis to be
70 351 FMX Mach I
67 347 TKO Coupe SoT/CAT5
67 289 C4 Coupe stockish cruiser
69 460 TKO Vert, Mustang Plus Grab a Track
94 351 TKO AIX, Maximum Motorsports
01 5.4 4L80E Twins and CrMo caged

http://www.hubgarage.com/mygarage/LukeSportsman
Lukesportsman is offline  
post #15 of 54 (permalink) Old 11-13-2010, 11:26 AM Thread Starter
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 46
Quote:
Originally Posted by supershifter2 View Post
in order to take full advantage of any of the above front setups work must be done on the rear to make it hook also.
I will be ordering TCP rear, coilovers and g-link on the same day.

I've always had some sort of strange issue w/ Watts and/or panhard lateral links for lateral stability. I know they effective, relatively simple, straight forward solutions but I am who I am.

To date, I've not read much in the way of advantages of GW over TCP or the reverse. For those that have dove in, what swayed you to your choice? For those that have opinions, what would sway your choice?

I'm asking because I can't say that I'm experienced enough in this sort of thing to make an educated decision. I really do not want to make an avoidable mistake because I was too proud to ask for help.
Thanks!!
pavulon is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the Vintage Mustang Forums forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in









Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page



Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome